Oxford Union president rape allegations - alumni open letter

[FairPhyllis]

The president of the Oxford Union (which is a debating society at Oxford), Ben Sullivan, is currently being investigated over allegations of rape and attempted rape of two undergraduates at the university. He is refusing to resign or suspend his presidency. Speakers are beginning to pull out of events.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10845979/Oxford-Union-boycott-after-president-returns-despite-police-investigation-into-rape-allegations.html

If you are a member of the university or an Oxford alumna/us, and feel strongly about the minimisation of rape and sexual assault "on campus" there is an open letter you can sign here calling for Sullivan to step aside while under investigation. It is organised by the OUSU VP (Women) and other students.

It's normal to step aside for the good of the organisation when you're investigated for something like this - it wouldn't be an admission of guilt and thinking he ought to do so isn't to prejudge whether he's guilty or innocent. The fact that he refuses to, though, speaks volumes.

Ah, I follow you meand. TBH, as I say, I don't 'choose' between the terms as I know some prefer one, some the other.

I think we can't really deny that some people who have been raped are going to be upset about it, as a bottom line. Sorry to put it so crassly, but, well, it is that simple.

It's not about whether he's guilty because even if he is innocent, even if he's not charged, he's demonstrated he thinks his presidency is more important than the feelings of people who have endured a horrible crime. That is not an attitude you should get to have, and continue in a role like his.

Cross posted and tunip made the point I wanted to make much more concisely. Oops.

My understanding is that although he hasn't resigned, he is suspended. Mayank Banerjee, President elect is acting Union President isn't he?

Difficult one as he has not yet been charged but from my experience as a member of a similar debating society at a different university, my issue with him staying in post is the well-being of students. These debating societies are typically very macho arenas to begin with and female undergrads who participate are often made to feel like nothing more than eye candy.

I would have hoped that things have changed since my day (about 10 years ago) but if I were a female undergrad at Oxford right now and wanted to get involved in debating I would certainly think twice given these accusations against the President and be concerned to see the Union take some steps to show that they take the accusations seriously.

slip - the link says he's been reinstalled.

It's not about whether he's guilty because even if he is innocent, even if he's not charged, he's demonstrated he thinks his presidency is more important than the feelings of people who have endured a horrible crime. That is not an attitude you should get to have, and continue in a role like his.

Yes, I completely agree with this. Sorry for not looking at it like this - you're right.

Slip No, he's come back. I think it sounds like at least some of the membership in Oxford are trying to get him out though.

No, no at all!

I'm just coming to this having had a little while to get my mind around it, because I'd been following the story.

I find it so very depressing.

Oh. Sorry didn't read that. The original letter asking for his resignation was on the website but I believe it was removed for legal reasons so I hadn't seen the article in the Telegraph.

Sorry original letter was on the New Statesman website I meant to write.

It's the link at the top of the page, in the OP.

It appears, from one of the links in the OP, that he was trying to use union funds to gag the press, to prevent other students learning about the allegations. If true, that would surely be an improper use of funds - I assume the aims and objectives of the Oxford Union do not include 'paying lawyers to hush up serious allegations about the President'.

He may be innocent of the alleged crime but it would appear he has handled the allegations very badly.

No that isn't quite right. He was given permission to use union funds to hush accusations of being a member of a laddish club. Then permission was withdrawn, I believe.. Then the complainants came forward about the alleged assaults which took place in Early 2013.

He wasn't using funds to hide rape allegations.

Oh yes, my mistake. But it's still Not On to use union funds to hush up allegations, especially allegations that it seems were true (that he belonged to a dining club).

The thing about Union funds relates to allegedly using Union funds to hush up a different allegation that he was a member of a drinking society. He has not attempted to gag newspapers over the rape investigation.

There has been a whole rash of resignations from the Union committee too, so it doesn't really look as though it's been a stellar presidency all round.

We'll as the Presidency is only for a term, he only managed two weeks of it.

I feel as the allegations involve students at the university he should temporarily step aside. I disagree with him resigning he hasn't even been charged yet.

I don't understand exactly how rape victims will be upset to hear of the allegations, but feel better if he steps aside.

Yes I think so. From his perspective though, he is on bail until June 19 and term ( and his presidency)ends days later. He will, I think, have taken a year out of his studies for this. Immaterial of course, if he has committed the offences. A bit tough if he hasn't.

Innocent until proven guilty!

Only for the duration of the investigation, and mainly because it is a serious allegation with him still having access to other students. I would feel the same if a banker was accused of fraud etc.

He's the one that has tied his personal reputation into that of the Union by using Union funds to defend that reputation - whether for the rape allegations or the drinking club allegations is immaterial.

He's in a public post. Even if he's innocent, but doesn't give a shit about the feelings of women who have survived assault, he presumably is supposed to care about the Union. If he had any respect at all for the Union, he'd withdraw until his name is cleared (if it is), as his continued presence is damaging the Union. The fact that he hasn't withdrawn is evidence that he isn't fit to hold a post there, even by the really shittily low bar of "protecting the reputation of the Union".

Sadly, whether he's innocent or not, it seems clear that he couldn't give a shit about the feelings of survivors.

MorrisZapp - I wouldn't really want to spend my leisure time going to meetings presided over by someone I thought was a rapist. It's a fair bet to say some rape survivors may feel the same way.

Titus - exactly.

Forgive me (posting in haste as out to hear Liz Kelly who's speaking in Oxford today - yay!), but I think there's much more to it.

Some people may think he's a rapist. Others may not. Lots of people will know him personally, as a friend or a peer, and I think it's hard to believe your friend/peer might be a criminal.

But, rapist or not, everyone now knows he doesn't care as much about rape as about himself. Sorry, but it's true. Yes, being president of the Union is lovely, very good for the CV, and so on. But it's also a responsibility. He could so easily have said 'out of respect for the feelings of anyone who has suffered this horrible crime, I will step down, so that the issue need not be discussed or raised in the context of the Union'. Then people who really do not want to be spending their time talking and thinking about rape (and possibly being triggered) would be able to attend.